not so long ago everybody had a little dog in a designer bag- Britney Spears- Paris Hilton Geri Haliwell etc - now they all seem to be adopting children from 3rd world countries ie Angelina Jolie, Madonna- Is this right or am I just being cynical??
2006-10-09 11:11:26 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Entertainment & Music ➔ Celebrities
i'm not saying its wrong to give these children a chance- but its always done so publically - surely with the millions these people have they could sponsor a small village in a poor country and not even notice the cost!!- they could do this quietly - and how on earth do you pick one child!!!
2006-10-09 11:20:22 · update #1
yes i think it's another im loaded let's buy an orphan and make more money doin interviews!! i love madonna but what she's doin is wrong, im far from racist, but if she that desperate why not adopt an american or english kid, hmm angelina's now started a who can adopt the most kids from different nations syndrome off now!! u have been warned lol, the celebs with wads 2 flash
2006-10-09 11:19:23 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Madonna apparently said that she wasn't adopting an African child, she just made a goodwill visit to the continent. However, she doesn't mind that someone started that rumour, because it drew attention to their plight.
But so what if stars do adopt third-world children? It's much kinder and humane than carrying a dog that has been inbred to f**k to be so small, and carrying the poor sickly little thing in a handbag... :(
2006-10-09 11:20:13 · answer #2 · answered by ? 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
While i share your cynicism i think that giving any child a better chance can only be a good thing .... but instead of adopting why dont they try promoting or aiding charities that help many children and not just the one ....
2006-10-09 11:22:00 · answer #3 · answered by jizzumonkey 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no i think you may have a point.
if they are so set on adopting a child, why do they have to go to a third world country to do it.
there are many hundreds if not thousands of children in our own countrys that desparately need good homes, so why not help them, is it because they would not get the publicty.
i know that may sound harsh but the third world is not the only place where there are children in desparate need.
2006-10-09 12:30:13 · answer #4 · answered by mythmagicdragon 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Maybe cynical but is it not nice to know that these poor kids will be given love,security and a good education.
Yes a shame to take them away from their homeland, however, they can always return when the are old enough to understand and fend for themselves.
2006-10-09 11:16:58 · answer #5 · answered by lyrapullman 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
accessory?. God, it truly is a complicated observe. i comprehend a guy, he's Millionaire. He works right here in my united states (it truly is a 3world one), i'm conversing approximately Venezuela. He works for the goverment, certainly. he's a Us citizen. he's an previous guy. He has 5 kiddos, and in easy terms one -a million- of them is his actual youngster (organic and organic i recommend). something -the 4- are accompanied. they arrive from detrimental families i assume. all of them are already grown up, different than the final one -she is a candy female-. they're all professionals, properly knowledgeable... and that i see those "proud eyes" in Mr. M, everytime he talks approximately "his little ones". I see his love for them, and in easy terms God is familiar with how enormous is my admiration for this good guy. With aaaalll that money, and his happines and blessing is his family. those 0.33 international united states adult men that once have been 4 little ones with little hopes of surviving our complicated streets, are actually able people, with a actual existence. i do no longer comprehend if those stars take those little ones as stunning accesories .. yet through them keen approximately giving the possibility to somebody "to stay to tell the story"... In Africa, the main important present is existence. in lots of streets of my "latinamerica", the main important present is existence. In Africa, while a baby would not "recieve" that best present, is because of the fact he dies of starvation. In Latinamerica while a baby would not recieve the main important present, is because of the fact he dies of starvation ... or is murdered contained in the line. i can't say if "they offered stunning third international international locations human accesories". yet God bless, Angelina, Madonna, Shakira, Ricky Martin, Nicole Kidman ... and a great form of others ... for what they do.
2016-10-02 03:18:15 · answer #6 · answered by dunkelberger 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It sure seems like it's becoming a "fashion accessory/fad." What'll happen next year when it's no longer "fashionable"? What about starting at home, in the US? There are *so* many children who's situation is just as bad.
Charity begins at home.
2006-10-09 11:20:41 · answer #7 · answered by pinduck85 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Maybe so, but these are the people who could give the children a chance. It really breaks my heart when the News shows them on TV.
2006-10-09 11:15:45 · answer #8 · answered by kayboff 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Its amazing we spend so much time about trying to save the children of the world we continue to forget about our own lost children of the United State of America.
2006-10-09 11:14:34 · answer #9 · answered by A.M. Gonzales 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
angolina for one is not false so, that absolute woman aside yes celebs are doing what comes natural / looking for there next media hit
2006-10-09 12:22:46 · answer #10 · answered by belter777 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋